User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 8:33:07 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Shocking that a group - many of whom have downplayed degrees in the first place and probably don't have one themselves - throwing out never-ending ad-hominems. You guys must take this thread really personally. How much did you donate to his  What was this one class you took that makes you more knowledgeable on the relevant law than a lawyer on that state's bar? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:15:33 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What was this one class you took that makes you more knowledgeable on the relevant law than a lawyer on that state's bar? Is it safe to assume that your position is Jackson Brown is more knowledgeable than you on what a woman is since she's on SCOTUS and passed a bar somewhere? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:19:45 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Shocking that a group - many of whom have downplayed degrees in the first place and probably don't have one themselves - throwing out never-ending ad-hominems. You guys must take this thread really personally. How much did you donate to his I don’t know about any of that but I found that assertion interesting is all. I’ve watched a ton of Long Island Audit’s videos at this point probably over 100. His methods are definitely some of the better ones in that community. There are plenty of dirt bags in the space and a member here has said that he has a criminal past but he still acts pretty respectfully and doesn’t do a lot of the shady antagonistic stuff you see the crappy auditors doing. He is obviously focused on NYC currently and I can’t blame him as they are known for being heavy handed. He already played this out at another precinct and they ended up dropping the charges and returning his property. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:26:29 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What was this one class you took that makes you more knowledgeable on the relevant law than a lawyer on that state's bar? I took a class on the first amendment as I said earlier in this thread - but that class isn't what made me more knowledgeable. That's called looking up the law and interpreting it - something you don't need to be a lawyer to do - something even someone like yourself is probably capable of. I can't ask my brother any question about Illinois and get an answer - in fact, he had his wife hire a different lawyer for a workplace issue. What do you think the odds are that a city ordinance passed in 2020 was on his bar exam or whatever study guide NYS provides? You seem super fascinated by my education though so for the amount of your boy's GoFundMe graft at the time of payout - ~$12,000 as of yesterday - I'll send you a verifiable copy of my transcript. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:35:17 AM EST
[#5]
Narcissism entwined with visions of grandeur. Not a pretty look.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:38:36 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Narcissism entwined with visions of grandeur. Not a pretty look. Another graft-supporting challenger throwing an ad-hominem. Truly shocking.  Let's check from his previous posts what types of threads Intune is drawn to in just the last 30 days. Example #1 "If I stand there like a deaf mute I don’t have to invoke or articulate squat. Your move, copper." Example #2 "I hope you scorch their asses." - (referring to a PD) Example #3 "Oh, damn, I thought it was Daniel Niger! Oh, that’s funny. You know, close to it. You know. The word. That’s not mentioned. By white people. Because." Example #4 "Say what? Please. Hopped-up Negros have been a problem since way before that… Read that again and then begin to realize how fucked up the desire to control people is. I dare a Mod to censor this. Don’t make me bring up the $200 tax stamp." https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Minnesota-becomes-first-state-to-legalize-ALL-drug-paraphernalia-and-drug-residue/5-2647171/ I would watch what labels you throw at other people bud. You give all gun owners a bad name. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:46:59 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I took a class on the first amendment as I said earlier in this thread - but that class isn't what made me more knowledgeable. That's called looking up the law and interpreting it - something you don't need to be a lawyer to do - something even someone like yourself is probably capable of. I can't ask my brother any question about Illinois and get an answer - in fact, he had his wife hire a different lawyer for a workplace issue. What do you think the odds are that a city ordinance passed in 2020 was on his bar exam or whatever study guide NYS provides? You seem super fascinated by my education though so for the amount of your boy's GoFundMe graft at the time of payout - ~$12,000 as of yesterday - I'll send you a verifiable copy of my transcript. That was quite the edit you just did. I was writing my response and you just 100% changed the post. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:48:19 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it safe to assume that your position is Jackson Brown is more knowledgeable than you on what a woman is since she's on SCOTUS and passed a bar somewhere? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What was this one class you took that makes you more knowledgeable on the relevant law than a lawyer on that state's bar? Is it safe to assume that your position is Jackson Brown is more knowledgeable than you on what a woman is since she's on SCOTUS and passed a bar somewhere? It's safe to assume that she's more knowledgeable about the law than I am. I'm not sure how that transfers to understanding of anatomy and physiology. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:49:29 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another graft-supporting challenger throwing an ad-hominem. Truly shocking. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Narcissism entwined with visions of grandeur. Not a pretty look. Another graft-supporting challenger throwing an ad-hominem. Truly shocking. I didn't see a name or quote on his post. Do you believe he was referring to you? Why? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:49:45 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was quite the edit you just did. I was writing my response and you just 100% changed the post. Sorry - I did an accidental double tap and someone had already posted in-between it so I had to turn it into two thoughts 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:51:57 AM EST
[#11]
...because his reply was directly after my post and I checked his post history pattern.
In other words- research - the same reason I knew what the NYC ordinance was and spoke on it before the NYS bar-approved lawyer posting in the thread. The same reason you know who I'm responding to here. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:51:59 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On what statute are you basing your definition of “under the color of law”? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Under color of law just means someone is acting as an agent of the government v private individual with No government affiliation. As a private attorney I don't act under color of law. If I am appointed as a special prosecutor I am acting under color of law. Sitting at a desk in uniform in a lobby on the clock is under color of law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242 You think it's a defense to 18 USC 242 that an officer violated someone's constitutional rights in a lobby of a police station? You don't have much of a 1A right in the lobby of a police station - it's a nonpublic forum per SCOTUS. Now you want to talk about 18 USC 242 when previously it was only the NYC ordinance you could point to? ...and no - sitting at a desk in a lobby on the clock isn't acting under the color of law. Color of law is the legal appearance to actions - with or without legitimacy. Sitting at a desk is most certainly not automatically a police activity under the "color of law" no more than taking a shit while in uniform is. If your point was true - that 'color of law' was anything and everything - police activity wouldn't need to be defined by the ordinance in the first place. On what statute are you basing your definition of “under the color of law”? Bringing to the back so the question doesn't get missed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 9:59:01 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bringing to the back so the question doesn't get missed. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Under color of law just means someone is acting as an agent of the government v private individual with No government affiliation. As a private attorney I don't act under color of law. If I am appointed as a special prosecutor I am acting under color of law. Sitting at a desk in uniform in a lobby on the clock is under color of law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242 You think it's a defense to 18 USC 242 that an officer violated someone's constitutional rights in a lobby of a police station? You don't have much of a 1A right in the lobby of a police station - it's a nonpublic forum per SCOTUS. Now you want to talk about 18 USC 242 when previously it was only the NYC ordinance you could point to? ...and no - sitting at a desk in a lobby on the clock isn't acting under the color of law. Color of law is the legal appearance to actions - with or without legitimacy. Sitting at a desk is most certainly not automatically a police activity under the "color of law" no more than taking a shit while in uniform is. If your point was true - that 'color of law' was anything and everything - police activity wouldn't need to be defined by the ordinance in the first place. On what statute are you basing your definition of “under the color of law”? Bringing to the back so the question doesn't get missed. He's clearly stated he's read the law and is far better capable at interpreting it than a lawyer who passed the bar in that state. ( I'm not even a fan of this person but that doesn't change his qualifications). Destaccado has got to be one of the top trolls on Arfcom. I just can't see someone being that dense without being a politician. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:01:47 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He's clearly stated he's read the law and is far better capable at interpreting it than a lawyer who passed the bar in that state. ( I'm not even a fan of this person but that doesn't change his qualifications). Destaccado has got to be one of the top trolls on Arfcom. I just can't see someone being that dense without being a politician. Watch it! He'll check you posting history! In between being wrong most of the time. You have been warned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:05:57 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bringing to the back so the question doesn't get missed. I wasn't able to find a single place where "color of law" is specifically defined in statue of either NY state or the federal government. If you are able to find a direct interpretation - please share. https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2019/title-18/part-i/chapter-13/sec-242/ Per Sandoval v. Colorado Div of Employment: "Holley v. Lavine, 553 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 947, 98 S. Ct. 1532, 55 L. Ed. 2d 545 (1978), decided the year after 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(14)(A) (1976) was enacted, is the leading federal case defining the phrase. In Holley, the court defined "under color of law" as meaning: "that which an official does by virtue of power, as well as what he does by virtue of right. The phrase encircles the law, its shadows, and its penumbra. When an administrative agency or a legislative body uses the phrase "under color of law" it deliberately sanctions the inclusion of cases that are, in strict terms, outside the law but are near the border." Is an LE official in a precinct - a non-public forum using their official power - to what extent - and when? It's questionable. Ultimately, it's questionable whether or not the NYC ordinance applies to the precinct. My interpretation is it likely does not and I have a suspicion the NYPD legal team feels the same but other informed individuals might interpret it differently. Most here though aren't interpreting anything though - they've simply been misled by someone I believe is a grifter and not surprisingly most have a history of posting in anti-cop threads. To be clear - I don't include you in that group. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:07:45 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another graft-supporting challenger throwing an ad-hominem. Truly shocking. Let's check from his previous posts what types of threads Intune is drawn to in just the last 30 days. Example #1 "If I stand there like a deaf mute I don’t have to invoke or articulate squat. Your move, copper." Example #2 "I hope you scorch their asses." - (referring to a PD) Example #3 "Oh, damn, I thought it was Daniel Niger! Oh, that’s funny. You know, close to it. You know. The word. That’s not mentioned. By white people. Because." Example #4 "Say what? Please. Hopped-up Negros have been a problem since way before that… Read that again and then begin to realize how fucked up the desire to control people is. I dare a Mod to censor this. Don’t make me bring up the $200 tax stamp." https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Minnesota-becomes-first-state-to-legalize-ALL-drug-paraphernalia-and-drug-residue/5-2647171/ I would watch what labels you throw at other people bud. You give all gun owners a bad name. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Narcissism entwined with visions of grandeur. Not a pretty look. Another graft-supporting challenger throwing an ad-hominem. Truly shocking. Let's check from his previous posts what types of threads Intune is drawn to in just the last 30 days. Example #1 "If I stand there like a deaf mute I don’t have to invoke or articulate squat. Your move, copper." Example #2 "I hope you scorch their asses." - (referring to a PD) Example #3 "Oh, damn, I thought it was Daniel Niger! Oh, that’s funny. You know, close to it. You know. The word. That’s not mentioned. By white people. Because." Example #4 "Say what? Please. Hopped-up Negros have been a problem since way before that… Read that again and then begin to realize how fucked up the desire to control people is. I dare a Mod to censor this. Don’t make me bring up the $200 tax stamp." https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Minnesota-becomes-first-state-to-legalize-ALL-drug-paraphernalia-and-drug-residue/5-2647171/ I would watch what labels you throw at other people bud. You give all gun owners a bad name. Parody, sarcasm and context seem to become fleeting concepts for some whilst in the throes of grandstanding. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:10:36 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Parody, sarcasm and context seem to become fleeting concepts for some whilst in the throes of grandstanding. I read the context and so can anyone else. I'm confident it wasn't unfairly taken out of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:12:02 AM EST
[#18]
Ultimately, I think I've presented all my evidence. If you want to donate to graft - do so.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:13:36 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wasn't able to find a single place where "color of law" is specifically defined in statue of either NY state or the federal government. If you are able to find a direct interpretation - please share. https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2019/title-18/part-i/chapter-13/sec-242/ Per Sandoval v. Colorado Div of Employment: "Holley v. Lavine, 553 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 947, 98 S. Ct. 1532, 55 L. Ed. 2d 545 (1978), decided the year after 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(14)(A) (1976) was enacted, is the leading federal case defining the phrase. In Holley, the court defined "under color of law" as meaning: "that which an official does by virtue of power, as well as what he does by virtue of right. The phrase encircles the law, its shadows, and its penumbra. When an administrative agency or a legislative body uses the phrase "under color of law" it deliberately sanctions the inclusion of cases that are, in strict terms, outside the law but are near the border." Is an LE official in a precinct - a non-public forum using their official power - to what extent - and when? It's questionable. You keep focusing on the non public aspect and continue to fail that the city and state made it public for filming. A specific exception or rule as required by the USSC that you pasted in one of you posts. Color of law is pretty self explanatory also. Focus on the topic of the thread which is the LIA case and it will make more sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:16:50 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You keep focusing on the non public aspect and continue to fail that the city and state made it public for filming. A specific exception or rule as required by the USSC that you pasted in one of you posts. Color of law is pretty self explanatory also. Focus on the topic of the thread which is the LIA case and it will make more sense. No - the city and the state made it possible to film police when they're operating "under color of law" - that's exactly what the statue says. They didn't say - "you can film all police activities - anytime, anywhere." The law has been posted multiple times in this thread now - try reading it. Further, I just showed evidence that differs from what Aimless stated "color of law" means. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:17:15 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wasn't able to find a single place where "color of law" is specifically defined in statue of either NY state or the federal government. If you are able to find a direct interpretation - please share. https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2019/title-18/part-i/chapter-13/sec-242/ Per Sandoval v. Colorado Div of Employment: "Holley v. Lavine, 553 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 947, 98 S. Ct. 1532, 55 L. Ed. 2d 545 (1978), decided the year after 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(14)(A) (1976) was enacted, is the leading federal case defining the phrase. In Holley, the court defined "under color of law" as meaning: "that which an official does by virtue of power, as well as what he does by virtue of right. The phrase encircles the law, its shadows, and its penumbra. When an administrative agency or a legislative body uses the phrase "under color of law" it deliberately sanctions the inclusion of cases that are, in strict terms, outside the law but are near the border." Is an LE official in a precinct - a non-public forum using their official power - to what extent - and when? It's questionable. Ultimately, it's questionable whether or not the NYC ordinance applies to the precinct. My interpretation is it likely does not and I have a suspicion the NYPD legal team feels the same but other informed individuals might interpret it differently. Most here though aren't interpreting anything though - they've simply been misled by someone I believe is a grifter and have a history of posting in anti-cop threads. To be clear - I don't include you in that group. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Bringing to the back so the question doesn't get missed. I wasn't able to find a single place where "color of law" is specifically defined in statue of either NY state or the federal government. If you are able to find a direct interpretation - please share. https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2019/title-18/part-i/chapter-13/sec-242/ Per Sandoval v. Colorado Div of Employment: "Holley v. Lavine, 553 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 947, 98 S. Ct. 1532, 55 L. Ed. 2d 545 (1978), decided the year after 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(14)(A) (1976) was enacted, is the leading federal case defining the phrase. In Holley, the court defined "under color of law" as meaning: "that which an official does by virtue of power, as well as what he does by virtue of right. The phrase encircles the law, its shadows, and its penumbra. When an administrative agency or a legislative body uses the phrase "under color of law" it deliberately sanctions the inclusion of cases that are, in strict terms, outside the law but are near the border." Is an LE official in a precinct - a non-public forum using their official power - to what extent - and when? It's questionable. Ultimately, it's questionable whether or not the NYC ordinance applies to the precinct. My interpretation is it likely does not and I have a suspicion the NYPD legal team feels the same but other informed individuals might interpret it differently. Most here though aren't interpreting anything though - they've simply been misled by someone I believe is a grifter and have a history of posting in anti-cop threads. To be clear - I don't include you in that group. I don't believe it's questionable whether the ordinance applies to the precinct when that appears to be the intent of the law. I furthermore believe "under the color of law" is to mean official acts and not those done by a government employee during their personal time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:20:43 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No - the city and the state made it possible to film police when they're operating "under color of law" - that's exactly what the statue says. They didn't say - "you can film all police activities - anytime, anywhere." The law has been posted multiple times in this thread now - try reading it. Further, I just showed evidence from SCOTUS that differs from what Aimless stated "color of law" means. I read it quite well and did a few searches before posting it. You on the other hand, are try to argue the color grey isn't grey. but a combination of black and white. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:28:17 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it safe to assume that your position is Jackson Brown is more knowledgeable than you on what a woman is since she's on SCOTUS and passed a bar somewhere? Jackson Brown? The singer from The Eagles? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:29:21 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't believe it's questionable whether the ordinance applies to the precinct when that appears to be the intent of the law. I furthermore believe "under the color of law" is to mean official acts and not those done by a government employee during their personal time. I respect your interpretation. ...but I believe it doesn't matter if they're on their personal time or not since not everything a cop does while in uniform is done "by virtue of power or by virtue of right" and some of what they do out of uniform still is as Aimless alluded to earlier. I think the additional authority invested in officers under law primarily relates to their ability to ticket, arrest, etc which are marginal aspects of what goes on inside a precinct. Since the precinct is a non-public forum - current SCOTUS precedent doesn't give much 1A protection to that space. At the end of the day - it's really just my interpretation and a judge could see it differently. Will LIA have his charges dropped? Probably...it's a $250 fine under NYS law and he's already collected thousands and thousands of dollars in revenue. Why would a NYC DA - an ultra-liberal politician - waste their time making an example of him? Will he win any sort of lawsuit in court? Almost certainly not. Maybe they'll throw him 10k in a settlement since it's cheaper than litigation. In any event - for him it was a huge win on a brilliant business model. The dummies here are the people sending him money and getting spun up about it without an understanding of the complexities at play. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:35:12 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I respect your interpretation. ...but I believe it doesn't matter if they're on their personal time or not since not everything a cop does while in uniform is done "by virtue of power or by virtue of right" and some of what they do out of uniform still is as Aimless alluded to earlier. I think the additional authority invested in officers under law primarily relates to their ability to ticket, arrest, etc which are marginal inside a precinct. Since the precinct is a non-public forum - current SCOTUS precedent doesn't give much 1A protection to that space. At the end of the day - it's really just my interpretation and a judge could see it differently. Will LIA have his charges dropped? Probably...it's a $250 fine under NYS law and he's already collected thousands and thousands of dollars in revenue. Why would a NYC DA - an ultra-liberal politician - waste their time making an example of him? Will he win any sort of lawsuit in court? Almost certainly not. Maybe they'll throw him 10k in a settlement since it's cheaper than litigation. In any event - for him it was a huge win on a brilliant business model. The dummies here are the people sending him money and getting spun up about it without an understanding of the complexities at play. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't believe it's questionable whether the ordinance applies to the precinct when that appears to be the intent of the law. I furthermore believe "under the color of law" is to mean official acts and not those done by a government employee during their personal time. I respect your interpretation. ...but I believe it doesn't matter if they're on their personal time or not since not everything a cop does while in uniform is done "by virtue of power or by virtue of right" and some of what they do out of uniform still is as Aimless alluded to earlier. I think the additional authority invested in officers under law primarily relates to their ability to ticket, arrest, etc which are marginal inside a precinct. Since the precinct is a non-public forum - current SCOTUS precedent doesn't give much 1A protection to that space. At the end of the day - it's really just my interpretation and a judge could see it differently. Will LIA have his charges dropped? Probably...it's a $250 fine under NYS law and he's already collected thousands and thousands of dollars in revenue. Why would a NYC DA - an ultra-liberal politician - waste their time making an example of him? Will he win any sort of lawsuit in court? Almost certainly not. Maybe they'll throw him 10k in a settlement since it's cheaper than litigation. In any event - for him it was a huge win on a brilliant business model. The dummies here are the people sending him money and getting spun up about it without an understanding of the complexities at play. The "non-public forum" portion is a red herring in the conversation of whether their actions are under the color of law. Since you assert that administrative actions done in a police station aren't under the color of law, would you suggest that an officer typing a report which results in a rights violation through falsification of information isn't being done under the color of law? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 10:55:18 AM EST
[#26]
Some of the interesting examples:
Color of law Under color of law and in service of a public function, Defendant LaSalle Corrections has been providing corrections services to federal, state, county, and municipal law enforcement agencies for more than 20 years. Under color of law, Defendants CITY and RHEE ratified and acted with deliberate indifference to the unconstitutional acts of HELM, ALESIA, and MARTIN as to Plaintiffs’ deprivations. Under color of law, School Defendants adopted, implemented, and are enforcing the Quarantine Policies. Edit: That last one is my favorite. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 11:19:43 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He's clearly stated he's read the law and is far better capable at interpreting it than a lawyer who passed the bar in that state. ( I'm not even a fan of this person but that doesn't change his qualifications). Destaccado has got to be one of the top trolls on Arfcom. I just can't see someone being that dense without being a politician. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 11:23:33 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I furthermore believe "under the color of law" is to mean official acts and not those done by a government employee during their personal time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 11:25:32 AM EST
[#29]
I expect the law will be amended now that this grey area is getting attention
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 11:27:08 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The dummies here are the people sending him money and getting spun up about it without an understanding of the complexities at play. I've only watched his videos - and with a VPN and Ad Block running, so I don't know if he gets paid for my views or not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 1:05:51 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Some of the interesting examples: Color of law Under color of law and in service of a public function, Defendant LaSalle Corrections has been providing corrections services to federal, state, county, and municipal law enforcement agencies for more than 20 years. Under color of law, Defendants CITY and RHEE ratified and acted with deliberate indifference to the unconstitutional acts of HELM, ALESIA, and MARTIN as to Plaintiffs’ deprivations. Under color of law, School Defendants adopted, implemented, and are enforcing the Quarantine Policies. Edit: That last one is my favorite. I bet they adopted, implemented, and enforced that policy in a non-public forum. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 1:18:13 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I bet they adopted, implemented, and enforced that policy in a non-public forum. More like semi non-public forum?  You just earned a posting history check. Congratulations! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 1:37:50 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No one here has stated they have donated a penny. I couldn't donate even if I wanted to. I'm saving up for tickets to the next Jackson Brown concert. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 2:14:16 PM EST
[#34]
I would weigh in but I’m not sure my first amendment classes were as prestigious so I should probably sit this one out.
This thread reads like a first year law student flexing his interpretation of the law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 2:17:20 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He is going to.cash in on that one Without reading the law, I’m going to stick my neck out and say it doesn’t apply inside government buildings. I’m probably wrong and beat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 2:33:56 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No one here has stated they have donated a penny. That's essentially a personal attack - although a ridiculously mild one. I wish you guys would back off a bit. I've only watched his videos - and with a VPN and Ad Block running, so I don't know if he gets paid for my views or not? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The dummies here are the people sending him money and getting spun up about it without an understanding of the complexities at play. I've only watched his videos - and with a VPN and Ad Block running, so I don't know if he gets paid for my views or not? I don’t know at what point a video gets monetized but if they are making money, good for them. I have seen a few of these auditor videos where security guards get all pushy and threatening and the police officer will pull up and calmly tell them to leave the guy alone and that he is breaking no laws. “Don’t go past that pole over there, the property curves in right there and they can get ya.” Wink. Or a supervisor arrives and tells the mistaken officer to go back to his car. Those are the smart cops and the satisfying videos. The cringe ones usually involve asking for ID and then handcuffs. Beat the rap but not the ride geniuses. Taxpayer-funded lawsuits. It shouldn’t be like that but sometimes it do… |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 2:44:13 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He is going to.cash in on that one |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 2:57:52 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lotta bootlickers up in here. Most lost their gag reflex years ago or were born without one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 3:10:10 PM EST
[#39]
I just talked to the office of the sponsor for the State bill that passed. They fully meant for allowance inside the public lobby areas of all government buildings.
Kevin S Parkers office (518) 455-2580. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 3:11:51 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just talked to the office of the sponsor for the State bill that passed. They fully meant for allowance inside the public lobby areas of all government buildings. Kevin S Parkers office (518) 455-2580. What the fuck does he know? He didn't get top marks in that one law class! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 3:16:35 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What the fuck does he know? He didn't get top marks in that one law class!  So much for mistaken intent or miswording. Maybe he will call them and tell them they are wrong.I'd call NYC next but I've had enough contact with NY as it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 6:02:45 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I took a class on the first amendment as I said earlier in this thread - but that class isn't what made me more knowledgeable. That's called looking up the law and interpreting it - something you don't need to be a lawyer to do - something even someone like yourself is probably capable of. I can't ask my brother any question about Illinois and get an answer - in fact, he had his wife hire a different lawyer for a workplace issue. What do you think the odds are that a city ordinance passed in 2020 was on his bar exam or whatever study guide NYS provides? You seem super fascinated by my education though so for the amount of your boy's GoFundMe graft at the time of payout - ~$12,000 as of yesterday - I'll send you a verifiable copy of my transcript. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What was this one class you took that makes you more knowledgeable on the relevant law than a lawyer on that state's bar? I took a class on the first amendment as I said earlier in this thread - but that class isn't what made me more knowledgeable. That's called looking up the law and interpreting it - something you don't need to be a lawyer to do - something even someone like yourself is probably capable of. I can't ask my brother any question about Illinois and get an answer - in fact, he had his wife hire a different lawyer for a workplace issue. What do you think the odds are that a city ordinance passed in 2020 was on his bar exam or whatever study guide NYS provides? You seem super fascinated by my education though so for the amount of your boy's GoFundMe graft at the time of payout - ~$12,000 as of yesterday - I'll send you a verifiable copy of my transcript. So you don't need to be a lawyer to be able to understand the law, but police can't be expected to understand the law they enforce? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 6:23:54 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just talked to the office of the sponsor for the State bill that passed. They fully meant for allowance inside the public lobby areas of all government buildings. Kevin S Parkers office (518) 455-2580. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 6:36:32 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just talked to the office of the sponsor for the State bill that passed. They fully meant for allowance inside the public lobby areas of all government buildings. Kevin S Parkers office (518) 455-2580. Like I said, they will amend it to make that clear |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 6:53:27 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Like I said, they will amend it to make that clear Perhaps if it becomes an issue. Only the LE side seems to not understand. I didn't ask specifically, but I really got a sense that all of those auditor videos had an impact. Out of courtesy to another poster, I raised the non public point and was shot down but fast. The attitude and response was public means public. Up to the auditors to behave like angels however. That was made really, really clear. No disturbances or getting in peoples faces. Go in film and show respect to others working or entering to do business. Just lobbies and clearly defined public areas. Any restricted areas remain so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 7:07:43 PM EST
[#46]
The statute doesn't say he can record private citizens, and that's what he did. Plus, the dude is simply a twat. Sic Semper Twatwaffles
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 7:10:23 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The statute doesn't say he can record private citizens, and that's what he did. Plus, the dude is simply a twat. Sic Semper Twatwaffles  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 7:14:34 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The statute doesn't say he can record private citizens, and that's what he did. Plus, the dude is simply a twat. Sic Semper Twatwaffles How do you feel about the cameras outside of the precinct filming citizens just walking by? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 7:48:21 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How do you feel about the cameras outside of the precinct filming citizens just walking by? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The statute doesn't say he can record private citizens, and that's what he did. Plus, the dude is simply a twat. Sic Semper Twatwaffles How do you feel about the cameras outside of the precinct filming citizens just walking by? Given the bureaucracy of release, data retention, and everything else, that footage is probably as well secured as the Arc of the Covenant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2023 8:15:02 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Given the bureaucracy of release, data retention, and everything else, that footage is probably as well secured as the Arc of the Covenant. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The statute doesn't say he can record private citizens, and that's what he did. Plus, the dude is simply a twat. Sic Semper Twatwaffles How do you feel about the cameras outside of the precinct filming citizens just walking by? Given the bureaucracy of release, data retention, and everything else, that footage is probably as well secured as the Arc of the Covenant. True, I just went down in flames, for I live in the land of the trannifesto. Well played, Sir!  Attached File |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
